It's not being willing to roll around in the mud. It's being good at rolling around in the mud. Some have a knack for it. Some don't. Bush was way better at it than Kerry. Clinton was better than anyone at it. But everyone tries to play the game, because it wins voters. Some are just better at it than their opponent.

This was an easy press release for him to put out. When someone reports something about you that isn't true, you have facts on your side. And facts are facts. Even so, as much of a no-brainer as this one was, it still had potential negative consequences. I had no idea there were allegations that he attended a maddrasa as a kid until you posted that link. So by responding, there's a chance he planted the seed in more people's minds than if he had just ignored it. It was a non-story that might not have ever gone anywhere.

Even so, he did the right thing, as far as I am concerned. When someone spreads a lie about you, you counter it with the truth. That isn't rolling around in the mud. That's just sticking up for yourself. And it's really easy, because facts are pursuasive.

Rolling around in the mud is when your opponent uses innuendo or puts spin on facts. That is the Swift Boat attack. And that is different than a baldfaced lie. There you each have a version of the truth. Someone is taking a nugget of truth and stretching it into something very negative about you. If you respond, you risk being painted as a liar. Whoever can put the best spin on it gets the most mileage from it. Unfortunately, that is the kind of crap that wins elections, because the average person is persuaded by nonsense.